What should I do if I want to be a Christian but feel no connection to Jesus as a historical or spiritual figure...

What should I do if I want to be a Christian but feel no connection to Jesus as a historical or spiritual figure? I've come to terms with the ethics and tradition of the Christian church and understand the position of the father God but the character of Jesus seems to me completely non-spectacular.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=36Y_ztEW1NE
youtube.com/watch?v=locW-9S00VU
youtube.com/watch?v=7NX-D-1bL_s
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Then you really can't be a Christian, point blank.
Islam is that way.

Nice job proselytizing.

A building's exterior is beautiful, but you don't want to go inside?

>listen to music, try to feel something
youtube.com/watch?v=36Y_ztEW1NE
youtube.com/watch?v=locW-9S00VU

Not even memeing, but Islam might be your kind of thing.

for which, christianity or islam? I'm mostly serious- Christ is understandably crucial to Christian belief.
is right

>Joining a violent, perverted version of christianity

t. layman whose understanding of Islam is grounded in orientalist misrepresentations form hundreds of years ago

Nah, Ahmed, I'm just basing myself on how they act in my country and memri. But do tell me of the peaceful modern islamics society user.

i mean you aren't necessarily always aware of where your information is coming from and what colors your perception
the euro collective consciousness remains pretty influenced by these outdated ideas
i would recommend doing some reading

dude, are correct. If you agree with everything else but really can't get behind the whole Son of God thing, then Islam is what you will want to look into.

However, as a Muslim you will need to honor JC as a prophet, so if you can't get behind that then you'd also have an issue with Islam.

The only violent form of Islam you're going to find is in the Wahabbi and Salafi flavors. Those are the ones that have been boogeyman'ing the world in recent times.

yeah I thought about pointing that out but didn't want to dishearten op
most mainstream forms of Islam are going to require that you pay some serious respect to Jesus, you just don't have to worship him

It's not exactly outdated when a bunch of well-know writers and journalists were killed a few years ago for drawing Mohammed, my friend.

Ironically, wasn't it forbidden to depict Mohammed because he was frustrated by people mocking him this way ? He would probably be proud of that.

Really, he would need to become accustomed to uttering honorifics when mentioning Muhammad, other prophets, Muhammad's companions (except for Abu Bakr and Umar if you're a Shia; especially Ali if you're a Shia), his wives (except Aisha if you're a Shia).

Of course, that's not worship at all, just serious respect, but I could see someone taking issue with being obliged to utter honorifics when just saying someone's name.

yeah I can see it too, but then again it comes part and parcel with a religion that defines itself as a total submission

true that

there's some argument to be made that the ban on depicting muhammad and people in general was a sort of pre-Islamic, arab quirk that didnt really take hold in the non-arab islamic world (think turkey and persia) until the modern globalized era
but that's a sidenote
you are earnestly missing out if you dismiss an entire religion and its cultures based on your current experiences with certain, decidedly modern aspects of it (like the salafi literalism that ideologically drives a lot of acts of terror)
again i would recommend doing some reading

honestly, one would gain a lot of understanding and knowledge about the core of Islam by simply reading the Quran. I personally, as an irreligious person who was raised in world where Islam was totally alien, found the Quran to really dispel a lot of the convictions I had previously held about Islam.

It's not a very long read, either.

the whole point is that he's like one of us.

actually a pretty profound post and good insight into the nature and appeal of christianity (maybe especially catholicism)

Well, then, if it's just a part of this, then there must be some islamics society who are ok, right ?

As far as I know Islam is violent (terrorismes, hate of my country, death threats against people who mock them) which isn't exactly surprising since the religion really started up when Mohammed became a bandit. It also gravitate toward mystics bullshit since you can't have science who contradict their book (thus the ignorance of muslims country and their defeat by the west). It seems to me that Mohammed also used the religion to give himself special right that his follower couldn't have.

I just don't see why I shouldn't see Islam as something negative.

At least their Satan is cool.

Th

I'm not becoming a Muslim you retards.

Just be an enlightened pagan deist with christian ethical and theological beliefs harmonized together

But I wanna go to church

Try Zohoastrism.

There have been Islamic societies that were "ok" by most Western standards. I've already recommended Samir Amin to someone on here today, but his idea regarding ascendency of the west ideologically is interesting- basically, the Islamic world mastered metaphysics (inheriting the intellectual legacy of Egypt, Greece, Rome, and Eastern Christianity) while the West never became as grounded in it. Because of this, the west was more flexible at adopting metaphysic's replacement, "empiricism"- and Islamic societies were more conservative in this regard. Also don't really know what you're on about with Muhammad being a bandit- it would be difficult to characterize the early Muslim community's raids on Meccan caravans as simple banditry. As far as Muhammad's "special rights"...not really, especially if you accept the Islamic narratives about Muhammad's character and pre-prophet life. And the Islamic narratives regarding divine revelation.

Why not? Is it because you can't even accept that Jesus was an important prophet if not divine?
this is the same ahistorical, modern frankensteining of religion that new age "spiritual" idiots do

Actually that's what a lot of the founding fathers were so eat a dick

sort of. doesn't make the ideology any less stupid.

Be a Catholic in the model of late medieval to early renaissance Catholicism, when the aesthetic and cultural aspects of the religion were emphasized rather than the contemporary Christian fixation on having a personal relationship with Jesus.

I wanna be Anglican. Wouldn't people think I'm like a fake Christian?

Become a Jew or Muslim.

>want to be anglican
please don't. just be catholic

I'm an Anglo though. If I went through with this I would like to attend the ACNA rather than the Episcopalian church of CoE.

From what I've read of Samir Amin on Islam, and what you're saying, it's just validating my opinion.

I know that there was good or great islamics societies, I'm not denying this. Dealing in absolute is absurde. I'm mostly asking about today. I just don't believe islams offer anything worthwhile today and since it is not without fault, we'll be better off without.


>- it would be difficult to characterize the early Muslim community's raids on Meccan caravans as simple banditry.

They were still violent raids.

>As far as Muhammad's "special rights"...not really

What would you call it then ? He clearly used his "revelations" to advantage himself.

Why would they think that? The Ecclesia Anglicana is one of the oldest churches in the world and maintains apostolic succession. Anglicanism was responsible for the mass spread of Christianity throughout the world and throughout the British Empire through national Anglican churches (African Churches, Anglican Church of Japan, Gibraltar, Hong Kong etc.) and via the king james translation of the bible.

Anglicanism is as legitimate as romanism, orthodox or lutheran. However, if you're joining a denomination just to be seen as "christian" than you are doing so for the wrong reasons. Follow Christ, allow him to guide you and pray for wisdom regarding your choice of church. Though I am dedicated to the Anglican church, God comes first and I am a follower of Christ before I'm an Anglican.

In the West it seems they've smothered the character of Jesus with excessive absolutist ideals of him. It would probably be better to overlook all that creedal quarreling that the different sects and church patriarchs made and adopt a more simple attitude like that which the early lay followers may have had which might have simply resembled the eastern reverence of spiritual figures like a practice of spiritual benefit such as in sects like Pure Land Buddhism and such.

Those were two separate statements. I don't doubt the legitimacy of Anglicanism, I would worry about being a fake Christian because I couldn't develop a relationship with Christ.

The work by Amin I referenced there was specifically regarding the rise of Western empiricism and Islam's apparent inability to adapt to it- it's an interesting (if simplified) idea no matter how you feel about the religion.
I think it would be hard to argue that Islam is uniquely inept with regard to offering anything today- that argument would also apply to the other abrahamic faiths.

Yes they were violent raids, because it was a time of war. Jesus had the fortune to never be a political leader. Muhammad was not just a religious prophet but also a political figure that had to act in the interest of his "nation" as it were- interestingly more similar to the earlier abrahamic prophets than to jesus.
that's sort of an iffy claim that a lot of Europeans have fallen into making over the years- it comes down to matters of faith in the revelations and in Muhammad's genuine divine inspiration. There are instances in Quran and Hadith where Muhammad makes decisions that go against his political interests.

Isn't it essential in the religion to believe that Jesus is God, though?

>I would worry about being a fake Christian because I couldn't develop a relationship with Christ.

Every church is going to have its flaws. And while I believe that an episcopal polity is extremely beneficial to a healthy relationship with Christ, becoming closer with God is more than just going to Church every week and taking communion. Open up the bible and read, talk to God in prayer, do your best to understand Christ. (I know I need to work on this a lot, my relationship with God is in constant need of improvement).

That being said, Anglicanism has its problems now. No doubt the Western church has gone too far left (CofE, Episcopal)... but the beautiful thing about the communion is how there is room for conservatives and liberals. Here in Britain we have parishes that still choose to not have women vicars, others endorse it. The American church ordains gay bishops, the African totally oppose it. The worldwide communion is having serious talks about the issues right now, there is true discourse going on.

Still unsure why you would assume being Anglican could make you "fake." But I wish you the best in your search for a church.

(As for the ACNA vs. Episcopal... it doesn't really matter imo. ACNA allows women clergy now and will soon allow gay clergy just like Episcopal. It's just a club for dissenters that don't want to leave the communion)

It looks like a test of loyalty almost. I think the gospels themselves however more affirmably portray that it is important that Jesus be recognized as God's son who was resurrected after being crucified with emphasis on the resurrection part.

>I think it would be hard to argue that Islam is uniquely inept with regard to offering anything today- that argument would also apply to the other abrahamic faiths.

I'll argue that they already offer a sense of community to the western world, if only because it give us the same morals, which islam can't really give since it's foreign. At best it unify westerner in how they feel about islam but that also create strife. Muslims do not integrate all that well and their religions is part of that problems. The non-muslims faith also offer slightly less terrorisms.

>Yes they were violent raids, because it was a time of war.

Started by Mohammed after he got kicked out for shitting on the local religion. Then he attacked their caravans. This also gave us the moment when a bunch of Mohammed men kills Meccan during a sacred month and come back with spoils, Mohammed act outraged by their actions and then suddenly gets a revelation saying it's okay to kill Meccans during their sacred months since they are cunts.

>that's sort of an iffy claim that a lot of Europeans have fallen into making over the years

Yeah, I'm sure those 11 wives and their interdictions to marry after his death was totally revealed by God.

>There are instances in Quran and Hadith where Muhammad makes decisions that go against his political interests.

Probably to keep his image but maybe I'm wrong. I doubt Muhammad was stupid.

It's a wee late here, I'm going to bed, I'll probably check this thread tomorrow if it's still here

>christian ethics

>What should I do if I want to be a Christian but feel no connection to Jesus as a historical or spiritual figure?
>I've come to terms with the ethics and tradition of the Christian church and understand the position of the father God but the character of Jesus seems to me completely non-spectacular.
I have the opposite problem. I got a spiritual connection recently, but I'm very unsure of how to approach church.

Memri tv was founded by israelis who cherrypicked the craziest bullshit from arab television and translated it to english in order to make the world think arabs are insane.
of course the fact that they were able to find such things on arab tv means that there is a lot of crazy bullshit on there but what they're showing are only the fringes.

>What should I do if I want to be a Christian but feel no connection to Jesus as a historical or spiritual figure?

It's ok, the Church regards Jesus as a lesser subsidiary of Yahweh Terror Cells Inc. - not God and King as the documents claim him to be.

youtube.com/watch?v=7NX-D-1bL_s

Why do you want to do that? that sounds a lot like LARPing to me.
You don't need to be christian to have morals.

Idk where you get that source user but the one who killed pilgrims were the Arab quraish not the Muslim, Muhammad pbuh is a business man operating in the land of Syam modern days Syria before he's a prophet.

I want to be more humble.

Not an argument

nigger

Read up on the symbolic interpretation of the bible. Carl jung followed the symbolic interpretation and much of his writing alludes to it. A lot of my friends feel the same way and found the symbolic interpretation enlightening

This thread seems related enough to my question.
I don't understand catholics, why follow a human church and the addition to the religion it did and does?
Why don't people just read the bible and follow the bible rather then the bible and the church?

Jesus said to him, “If you can believe,all things are possible to him who believes.”

"Immediately the father of the child cried out and said with tears, “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!”

Mark 9: 23,24

Hare Krsna Hare Krsna
Krsna Krsna Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama
Rama Rama Hare Hare

And the news about once a week. Y'all have a PR problem.

Read Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologia, as well as the Catholic catechism. We've been here for 2000 years, you're not the first to like His church but have apathy for the Son of Man. The good news of Christ and his nature will be made known to you.

If you're in a hurry, just tell a preist and talk to him. You can phone for an appointment or attend a Confession (if you feel like holding up a line). They are obligated to help you with a crisis of faith, and they need 10 years and a degree to wear a Roman collar.

Jesus did not incarnate to give us a book, but he did found a church. That church assembled the scriptures we use now over the course of 300 years, though the newest book of the bible was written in 95 AD. That church was united for a thousand years and contemporary protestant "bible based" christianity does not look anything like it. If you want to see what historical Christianity looks like, take a look at an Eastern Orthodox Liturgy.

Caveat emptor: almost no one in the Church is really all that Thomistic anymore, not even the Dominicans. Join the RCC, and you'll likely be taught rather anti-Thomistic principles. Moreover, you'll likely never learn the Catechism or even really be taught it, and you WILL be taught things that are contrary to the CCC.

Only if you get bad teachers. Find a preist who celebrates a Latin Mass. Those men are traditionalists, and Revere Thomas. Bishop Baron, host of "word on fire" podcast is strictly thomist. Sedevacantists may also reveal something you may not have seen. If you're super paranoid, just read the original literature. The book is the hard way, preist is the easy way, traditionalist preist who never is seen without his copy of the literature is best.

>Hey, you should become Catholic
>But reject the pope
Yeah, you're no better than the supposed "Catholics" who are pro-abortion or reject the divinity of Christ.

I'm not a sedevacantist. I am a papist, but I recognize that the sedevacantists, like the Russian Orthodox, have a unique perspective and an appreciation of tradition.

^This. I'm an atheist and Jesus is one of my fave religious figures, lol.